PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI,J. - (1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming the following reliefs: "(a)The record of the case may kindly called for. (b) The impugned order dated 28.03.2018 (Annex.21) passed by the District Collector, the respondent No. 2, may kindly be set aside and quashed. (c) The enquiry report dated 16.03.2018 (Annex.23) may kindly be declared illegal and arbitrary. (d) The respondents may kindly be directed to re-instate the petitioner and grant all consequential benefits. (e) Any other appropriate writ or order or direction which is favourable to die petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted to the petitioner. (f) Costs of the litigation be allowed in favour of the petitioner."
(2.) The brief facts of this case as noticed by this Court are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Patwari on 28.12.1999. The petitioner was given a memorandum of charges on 23.10.2017 under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as The Rules of 1958'). In pursuance of the said memorandum of charges, the petitioner sought some documents vide his applications dated 23.11.2018 and 30.11.2018.
(3.) Thereafter, the petitioner was permitted inspection of the documents vide order dated 13.12.2017. The petitioner submitted a reply on 01.01.2018 denying the charges. A letter was issued on 03.01.2018 asking the petitioner to submit his reply to the charge sheet, even when the reply dated 01.01.2018 was already on record. The petitioner again sought the record on 15.01.2018. On 17.01.2018, the SDO, Revdar was appointed as Enquiry Officer and Tehsildar (Land Record) Collectorate Officer, Sirohi was appointed as Presenting Officer of the Department by the respondent No. 2, the Disciplinary Authority.;